BudgetHedgehog

It's not supposed to hold your hand and protect you against every mistake you could ever possibly make either. Like not paying attention to it while you're playing it.

Why would changing the way the game behaves fix someone not paying attention? The players mistake is the players mistake, not sure the onus is on the game to fix that.

Of course it would, they're just parts. However, the costs may be unbalanced.

No. Sometimes, the vessel you land isn't the vessel you took off with. Other times, it would be hard to track, considering you can have a multiple-launch mission, or recover half a craft later after undocking in orbit. It needs to wait until a mission concept actually exists in game, to which you attach contracts and launches. Credit to /u/LoSboccacc on Reddit for these very good reasons.

No, there's no point in creating a new flight style when Revert already does this. And this isn't clear on what the advantage would be. It's either a real mission or a simulation - you can't run a real mission and then say 'ahh, actually, I want it to be a simulation now'. Because A, you can still revert (or terminate etc) and B, this isn't 'more hardcore', it's less hardcore.And for people that find it too tempting to use Revert (something else I've always been confused by*), it can be disabled. *too tempting? So you want KSP devs to spend time on creating something just because you lack the self-restraint to click a button? Uhh....

It's a wonder how they did it in real life. Oh wait, they totally used smaller sections that could be docked together, along with folding sections and trusses.

You could ask damny, the original author. If you could get hold of him, that is. Read the last 50 odd pages or so of the original thread for more info.

Did you catch this, Bio? Pretty annoying bug :/ Though, now I look at it, the vessel is saved with full tanks and when I left them, they were very much not full. Hmm...

Completely agree. I think part of it comes down to the fact that the phrases would be repeated and repeated and repeated etc.. In flight, I like to know my numbers as well. That, and some mission profiles end up using more or less dV than the readout, even in KER, gives - such as docking another vessel to it, or using different engines. Other times, I design an SSTO rocket that has enough fuel for a Munar burn - at those times, I really need to know numbers, not just 'this can reach orbit!'. And how would phrases handle staging? I have set stages for each leg of a journey - I need to know if stage 2 has enough dV to land on the Mun, not that my whole vessel 'could get to the Mun'. Some people I know do like to play without serious planning or numbers, but I do and that's why I've installed KER and they haven't. Choices, yo. Also this:

MM would be needed for TweakableEverything, SpaceplanePlus, DRE, NEAR, TweakScale and a lot of other ones mentioned in that file. I'd be very surprised if he didn't have it installed (unless it was accidentally deleted). Though yeah, the other log would be more helpful.

The output_log.txt. Just search for 'exception' and see what mod is named in the lines after.

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. As with everything in x64, YMMV.

God, I hope not. I don't want free money or a bail-out, I want to fix things myself. Even if my funds get so low that I can't launch anything, there's contracts that give money in advance which is enough to give a headstart again. I don't like this idea as it basically removes any point of doing any contracts - why do anything if I can just timewarp until I have enough money to do what I want? If you want that, why not just play the Science mode or Sandbox... That and I don't see government funding as something that fits into KSP canon.

That file is private. But I'm getting the same experience as you, the tanks being refilled when I return to the vessel. I'll try removing TS and see what happens. EDIT: Confirmed, it's either TS or KAE that refills the tanks. Clean install with only MM and TS installed (64bit version), craft on launchpad gets tanks refilled. output_log.txt: http://pastebin.com/jKt3LJj8 Persistent.sfs: http://pastebin.com/Nn473EA0 It happens whenever the vessel is loaded - after a quicksave/load, when switched to via tracking station etc.

I've thought about it, but if I do, it'll be on a completely new save and I don't expect it to be a serious investment - I read that most mods aren't supported in it and I really do prefer playing with FAR, RLA and KWR at least. But it's something that's on my mind, along with RSS. As an aside, getting rid of the separate food, water and O2 cans and stack containers, leaving just the Life Support parts left and then adding TweakScale support to them cut down the part list immensely - one part for radial attachment, one for stack and the converters made a really compact part list.

That actually really interesting, I've always wondered that. As I also have Science Revisited installed, it's interesting to see what combinations of antennas are used. For reference, SR does this: // Rebalanced the antenna in weight, interval and resource costs @PART[longAntenna] { @MODULE[ModuleDataTransmitter] { @packetInterval = 0.8 } } @PART[mediumDishAntenna] { @mass = 0.025 @MODULE[ModuleDataTransmitter] { @packetInterval = 0.4 @packetResourceCost = 20.0 } } @PART[commDish] { @mass = 0.05 @MODULE[ModuleDataTransmitter] { @packetInterval = 0.2 @packetResourceCost = 40.0 } }

Because: I like a challenge, is all.

Once TACLS gets updated properly and is out of the pre-release phase, I'm totally installing it. With AntennaRange (basically RT2), Science Revisited (which moves stuff around in the tech tree), FAR (and no fairings yet) and actual monetary constraints to think about, my career is pretty challenging - I want to see the limit that I can achieve and with LS making probe-based missions more attractive but AntennaRange making them more difficult, while still keeping things aerodynamic and bringing in enough Science to progress. Things are going to be awesome..

Mihara came up with a good idea- for every part that can be TweakScaled, make it include an invisible, massless and non-transferable resource. The bigger you tweakscale the part, the more of said resource you have which means the more it'll cost you. The snag comes with making said resource completely invisible - not in the resource panel, right-click GUI, nothing - to the average player, it has to be invisible. If you solve that problem, you solve a big problem with all kinds of parts than can be resized in the editor.

Better late than never...

None at all, you might as well forget it.

Am I right in thinking this means ailerons etc can start at the correct orientation? Because that, along with Pads Part Angle Display and EE will raise VAB time to unprecedented levels of epic.

Blame Squad and the fact that debris doesn't give any recovery refund. Sucks, I know, but there isn't a lot to be done about it... EDIT: apparently

I don't think launch clamps have ever been deleted/recovered/anything. Seeing as they never take off, they're always 'landed' so I'm not sure this mod would interact with them.

You could just link it, you know. Even with that said, I don't think that's the answer that was sought. @lekkimsm2500, could you post a picture of your Gamedata, MechJeb2 folders and a screenshot of where the "5-6 different Mechjeb's" are in the tech tree? It sounds like you might have installed it incorrectly, I think.